Documents appear to confirm Oregon’s strategy in NCAA investigation

Documents released by the University of Oregon on Friday regarding the ongoing NCAA investigation into possible recruiting violations by the football program confirm that the Ducks have pursued a summary disposition process — essentially a plea bargain — whereby a school and the NCAA enforcement staff attempt to reach agreement on rules violations and sanctions.

A previous release of records in February indicated the UO might be seeking a summary disposition process, and Friday’s documents confirm that the UO’s lawyers and the NCAA have been discussing that option since at least April.

The process is referenced in a pair of April e-mails, the first from the NCAA to UO’s lawyers, and the second in an internal UO e-mail from James O’Fallon, the faculty athletics representative, to several athletic department administrators, including athletic director Rob Mullens.

One goal of the summary disposition process is to avoid a hearing before the NCAA Committee on Infractions. It’s not clear whether the NCAA ultimately would agree that Oregon should be able to avoid such a hearing, however.

Although heavily redacted, the documents — basically communication between the UO, its lawyer Mike Glazier and the NCAA — also revealed that the NCAA might consider Oregon a repeat violator based on a case stemming from 2004.

“I’m assuming the institution is cognizant that NCAA Bylaw 19.5.2.1.1 MAY be applicable in this case based on the COI’s 6/23/04 Infractions Report concerning the institution,” Steve Duffin, the NCAA’s associate director of enforcement, wrote to Glazier in March. The bylaw states a repeat offender could be subject to enhanced penalties if a major violation has occurred within five years of the starting date of a major penalty.

The UO was given a two-year probation on June 23, 2004, for what was termed a “major” violation involving the recruitment of tailback J.J. Arrington in 2003. Documents released in February showed the Ducks and the NCAA in apparent agreement that the current investigation relates to violations at least as early as 2008. Click here for the complete story.